Evaluation of arsenic field test kits for drinking water: Recommendations for improvement and implications for arsenic affected regions such as Bangladesh
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

The NOAA IR serves as an archival repository of NOAA-published products including scientific findings, journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other information authored or co-authored by NOAA or funded partners. As a repository, the NOAA IR retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
i

Evaluation of arsenic field test kits for drinking water: Recommendations for improvement and implications for arsenic affected regions such as Bangladesh

Filetype[PDF-1.40 MB]



Details:

  • Journal Title:
    Water Research
  • Personal Author:
  • NOAA Program & Office:
  • Description:
    Arsenic field test kits are widely used to measure arsenic levels in drinking water sources, especially in countries like Bangladesh, where water supply is highly decentralized and water quality testing infrastructure is limited. From a public health perspective, the ability of a measurement technique to distinguish samples above and below relevant and actionable drinking water standards is paramount. In this study, the performance of eight commercially available field test kits was assessed by comparing kit estimates to hydride generation atomic absorption spectroscopy (HG-AAS) analyses. The results of tests that control for user-dependent color matching errors showed that two kits (LaMotte and Quick II kits) provided accurate and precise estimates of arsenic, four kits (Econo-Quick, Quick, Wagtech and Merck kits) were either accurate or precise, but not both, and two kits (Hach and Econo-Quick II kits) were neither accurate nor precise. Tests were performed for arsenic concentration ranges commonly found in natural waters and treated waters (such as community drinking water filter systems), and also on laboratory generated arsenic standards in DI water. For those kits that did not perform well, test strips often produced colors too light compared to manufacturer-provided arsenic color calibration charts. Based on these results, we recommend stakeholders carefully re-consider the use of poorly performing field test kits until better quality control of components of these kits is implemented. In addition, we recommend that field test kit manufacturers provide suitable internal standards in every kit box for users to verify the veracity of manufacturer provided color charts.
  • Source:
    Water Research, 170, 115325
  • DOI:
  • ISSN:
    0043-1354
  • Format:
  • Publisher:
  • Document Type:
  • License:
  • Rights Information:
    CC BY-NC-ND
  • Compliance:
    Library
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at repository.library.noaa.gov

Version 3.27.1